1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a method for reducing emissions from evaporative control systems including activated carbon particulate-filled canisters and adsorptive monolith-containing canisters, which monoliths include activated carbon, and to using said adsorbing canisters to remove volatile organic compounds, and other chemical agents from fluid streams. More particularly, this invention relates to using said vapor-adsorbing materials in hydrocarbon fuel consuming engines.
2. Description of Related Art (Including Information Disclosed Under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98)
(a) Standard Working Capacity Adsorbents
Evaporation of gasoline from motor vehicle fuel systems is a major potential source of hydrocarbon air pollution. The automotive industry is challenged to design engine components and systems to contain, as much as possible, the almost one billion gallons of gasoline evaporated from fuel systems each year in the United States alone. Such emissions can be controlled by canister systems that employ activated carbon to adsorb and hold the vapor that evaporates. Under certain modes of engine operation, the adsorbed hydrocarbon vapor is periodically removed from the carbon by drawing air through the canister and burning the desorbed vapor in the engine. The regenerated carbon is then ready to adsorb additional vapor. Under EPA mandate, such control systems have been employed in the U.S. for about 30 years, and during that time government regulations have gradually reduced the allowable emission levels for these systems. In response, improvements in the control systems have been largely focused on improving the capacity of the activated carbon to hold hydrocarbon vapor. For example, current canister systems, containing activated carbon of uniform capacity, are readily capable of capturing and releasing 100 grams of vapor during adsorption and air purge regeneration cycling. These canister systems also must have low flow restrictions in order to accommodate the bulk flow of displaced air and hydrocarbon vapor from the fuel tank during refueling. Improvements in activated carbons for automotive emission control systems are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos.: 4,677,086; 5,204,310; 5,206,207; 5,250,491; 5,276,000; 5,304,527; 5,324,703; 5,416,056; 5,538,932; 5,691,270; 5,736,481; 5,736,485; 5,863,858; 5,914,294; 6,136,075; 6,171,373; 6,284,705.
A typical canister employed in a state of the art auto emission control system is shown in FIG. 1. Canister 1 includes support screen 2, dividing wall 3, a vent port 4 to the atmosphere (for when the engine is oft), a vapor source connection 5 (from the fuel tank), a vacuum purge connection 6 (for when the engine is running), and adsorbent material fill 7.
Other basic auto emission control system canisters are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,456,236; 5,456,237; 5,460,136; and 5,477,836.
Typical carbons for evaporative emission canisters are characterized by standard measurements of bed packing density (“apparent density,” g/mL), equilibrium saturation capacity for 100% butane vapor (“butane activity,” g/100 g-carbon), and purgeability (“butane ratio”), specifically, the proportion of adsorbed butane from the saturation step which can be recovered from the carbon by an air purge step. The multiplicative product of these three properties yields a measure of the carbon's effective butane “working capacity” (“BWC”, g/dL), measured by ASTM D5228-92, which has been established in the art as a good predictor of the canister working capacity for gasoline vapors. Carbons that excel for this application have high BWC, typically 9 to 15+g/dL BWC, as a result of high saturation capacities on a volumetric-basis for butane (the product of density and butane activity), and high butane ratios (>0.85). In terms of isothermal equilibrium adsorption capacities across all vapor concentrations, these carbons characteristically have high incremental capacity as a function of increased vapor concentration (i.e., isotherm curved upward on a semi-log graph). This isotherm upward curve reflects the high working capacity performance feature of these carbons, in that gasoline vapors are adsorbed in high quantity at high concentrations but readily released in high concentration to an air purge stream. In addition, these carbons tend to be granular (somewhat irregularly shaped) or cylindrical pellet, typically of a size just about 1-3 mm in diameter. It has been found that somewhat larger sizes hinder diffusional transport of vapors into and out of the carbon particle during dynamic adsorb and purge cycles. On the other hand, somewhat smaller size particles have unacceptably high flow restriction for displaced air and hydrocarbon vapors during refueling.
(b) Diurnal Breathing Loss (DBL) Requirements
Recently, regulations have been promulgated that require a change in the approach with respect to the way in which vapors must be controlled. Allowable emission levels from canisters would be reduced to such low levels that the primary source of emitted vapor, the fuel tank, is no longer the primary concern, as current conventional evaporative emission control appears to have achieved a high efficiency of removal. Rather, the concern now is actually the hydrocarbon left on the carbon adsorbent itself as a residual “heel” after the regeneration (purge) step. Such emissions typically occur when a vehicle has been parked and subjected to diurnal temperature changes over a period of several days, commonly called “diurnal breathing losses.” Now, the California Low Emission Vehicle Regulation makes it desirable for these diurnal breathing loss (DBL) emissions from the canister system to be below 10 mg (“PZEV”) for a number of vehicles beginning with the 2003 model year and below 50 mg, typically below 20 mg, (“LEV-II”) for a larger number of vehicles beginning with the 2004 model year. (“PZEV” and “LEV-II” are criteria of the California Low Emission Vehicle Regulation.)
While standard carbons used in the commercial canisters excel in terms of working capacity, these carbons are unable to meet DBL emission targets under normal canister operation. Furthermore, none of the standard measures of working capacity properties correlate with DBL emission performance. Nonetheless, one option for meeting emission targets is to significantly increase the volume of purge gas during regeneration in order to reduce the amount of residual hydrocarbon heel in the carbon bed and thereby reduce subsequent emissions. This strategy, however, has the drawback of complicating management of the fuel/air mixture to the engine during purge regeneration and tends to adversely affect tailpipe emissions, i.e., moving or redefining the problem rather than solving it. (See U.S. Pat. No. 4,894,072.)
Another option is to design the carbon bed so that there is a relatively low cross-sectional area on the vent-side of the canister system (the first portion of the bed to encounter purge air), either by redesign of the existing canister dimensions or by the installation of a supplemental, auxiliary vent-side canister of appropriate dimensions. This alternative has the effect of locally reducing residual hydrocarbon heel by increasing the intensity of purge for that vent-side portion of the bed, thereby improving its ability to retain vapors that would otherwise be emitted from the canister system under diurnal breathing conditions. The drawback is that there is a useful limit to which a portion of the bed can be elongated at reduced cross-sectional area without otherwise incurring excessive flow restriction by the canister system. In practice, this limit does not allow employing a sufficiently narrowed and elongated geometry to meet emission targets. (See U.S. Pat. No. 5,957,114.)
Another option for increasing the purge efficiency of a fuel vapor/air mixture fraction adsorbed in the pores of the adsorbent material is suggested by the teachings of U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,098,601 and 6,279,548 by providing a heating capability internal of the canister, or a section thereof, either to increase pressure in the vapor storage canister to expel hot vapor through the vapor/purge conduit back into the fuel tank where it condenses at the lower ambient temperature therein ('601) or to increase the purging efficiency of hydrocarbons from the heated adsorbent material and carry the purged fuel vapor to the induction system of an associated engine ('548). However, this increases the complexity of control system management, and there appears some inherent safety concerns in providing heating internal of a canister for trapping fuel vapors.
Thus, an acceptable remedy, which does not have drawbacks as the cited alternative approaches, is greatly desired. It is submitted that the invention disclosed and claimed herein provides the desired solution.